RUDN Journal of Psychology and PedagogicsRUDN Journal of Psychology and PedagogicsВестник Российского университета дружбы народов. Серия: Психология и педагогика2313-16832313-1705Peoples’ Friendship University of Russia named after Patrice Lumumba (RUDN University)3315710.22363/2313-1683-2022-19-4-781-797PERSONALITY AND CONTEMPORARY CHALLENGESЛИЧНОСТЬ И ВЫЗОВЫ СОВРЕМЕННОСТИResearch ArticleThe Role of Needs in Maintaining Attitudes That Legitimize the Socio-Political Status Quo in RussiaРоль потребностей в поддержании легитимизирующих социально-политический статус-кво установок в российском контекстеhttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-9298-2408PrusovaIrina S.ПрусоваИрина Сергеевна

Researcher, Laboratory for Psychology of Social Inequality

младший научный сотрудник, научно-учебная лаборатория психологии социального неравенства, департамент психологии

iprusova95@gmail.comhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-6024-2322BogatyrevaNatalia I.БогатыреваНаталья Игоревна

Research Intern, Laboratory for Psychology of Social Inequality

стажер-исследователь, научно-учебная лаборатория психологии социального неравенства, департамент психологии

bogatireva.natacha@yandex.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0002-1505-1412AgadullinaElena R.АгадуллинаЕлена Рафиковна

PhD in Psychology, is Associate Professor

кандидат психологических наук, доцент департамента психологии

eagadullina@hse.ruHSE UniversityНациональный исследовательский университет «Высшая школа экономики»31122022194VOL 19, NO4 (2022)ТОМ 19, №4 (2022)78179731122022Copyright ©; 2022, Prusova I.S., Bogatyreva N.I., Agadullina E.R.Copyright ©; 2022, Прусова И.С., Богатырева Н.И., Агадуллина Е.Р.2022Prusova I.S., Bogatyreva N.I., Agadullina E.R.Прусова И.С., Богатырева Н.И., Агадуллина Е.Р.https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0https://journals.rudn.ru/psychology-pedagogics/article/view/33157

In recent years, researchers have been focusing on a wide range of different constructs to study legitimizing grounds in socio-political relations. Political system justification, social dominance orientation (dominance and anti-egalitarianism) and political conservatism are considered as attitudes containing various grounds for legitimizing the currently existing socio-political relations (status quo). Maintaining these attitudes is associated with satisfying a number of psychological needs, including epistemic (e.g., the need for cognitive closure), existential (e.g., the need for security), and relational ones. The purpose of this research work was to study the contribution of needs in the maintenance of different attitudes legitimizing the socio-political status quo in the Russian context. With this in mind, we empirically examined the model, which considered needs as predictors, legitimizing attitudes as dependent variables, and sociodemographic characteristics associated with the maintenance of legitimizing attitudes (income, subjective social status, age, and gender) as control variables. The online study involved 387 Russian residents aged 18 to 73 who filled out questionnaires to assess the need for cognitive closure and fear of death as well as the relational need, social dominance orientation, political system justification and political conservatism. The data obtained were processed using structural equation modeling. The results of the study have shown that the most significant and consistent contribution in the maintenance of legitimizing attitudes is made by the epistemic needs (in particular, the need for cognitive closure). At the same time, the presence in everyday notions of a system of legitimizing attitudes makes it possible, depending on the context (e.g., the presence or absence of threats) or the socio-demographic characteristics of the individual (e.g., age and socio-economic status), to realize different needs, which ensures the flexibility of the process of social cognition.

В последнее время исследователи обращаются к широкому спектру разных конструктов для изучения легитимизирующих оснований в общественно-политических отношениях. В качестве установок, содержащих различные основания для легитимизации существующих на данный момент социально-политических отношений (статус-кво), рассматриваются оправдание политической системы, ориентация на социальное доминирование (доминирование и антиэгалитаризм) и политический консерватизм. Поддержание данных установок связано с удовлетворением ряда психологических потребностей: эпистемических (например, потребность в когнитивной завершенности), экзистенциальных (например, потребности в безопасности) и потребности в поддержании отношений с другими людьми. Цель исследования - изучить вклад потребностей в поддержание различных установок, легитимизирующих социально-политический статус-кво в российском контексте. Для реализации представленной цели эмпирически протестирована модель, в которой потребности рассматривались в качестве предикторов, легитимизирующие установки - зависимых переменных, а социально-демографические характеристики, связанные с поддержанием легитимизирующих установок (уровень дохода индивидов, субъективный социальный статус, возраст и пол респондентов), - контрольных переменных. В онлайн-исследовании приняли участие 387 жителей России в возрасте от 18 до 73 лет, которые заполняли методики на оценку потребности в когнитивной завершенности, страха смерти, потребности в поддержании отношений, ориентации на социальное доминирование, оправдания политической системы и политического консерватизма. Полученные данные обрабатывались при помощи моделирования структурными уравнениями. Результаты показали, что наиболее существенный и последовательный вклад в поддержании легитимизирующих установок вносят эпистемические потребности (в частности, потребность в когнитивной завершенности). При этом наличие в обыденных представлениях системы легитимизирующих установок позволяет в зависимости от контекста (например, наличие или отсутствие угроз) или социально-демографических характеристик индивида (например, возраст и социально-экономический статус) реализовывать разные потребности, что обеспечивает гибкость процесса социального познания.

political systemjustificationpolitical conservatismanti-egalitarianismdominanceneedsоправданиеполитическая системаполитический консерватизмантиэгалитаризмдоминированиепотребностиThe study was carried out with the financial support of the Russian Science Foundation (RSF) as part of scientific project No. 20-18-00142.Исследование выполнено при финансовой поддержке Российского научного фонда (РНФ) в рамках научного проекта No 20-18-00142.Adler, N.E., Boyce, T., Chesney, M.A., Cohen, S., Folkman, S., Kahn, R.L., & Syme, S.L. (1994). Socioeconomic status and health: The challenge of the gradient. American Psychologist, 49(1), 15–24. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.49.1.15Agadullina, E., Ivanov, A., & Sarieva, I. (2021). How do Russians perceive and justify the status quo: Insights from adapting the system justification scales. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 717838. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.717838Agadullina, E.R., Ivanov, A.A., Sarieva, I.R., & Prusova, I.S. (2021). System justification theory: A new perspective on the problem of inequality. Journal of Modern Foreign Psychology, 10(1), 132–141. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17759/jmfp.2021100113Агадуллина Е.Р., Иванов А.А., Сариева И.Р., Прусова И.С. Теория оправдания системы: новый взгляд на проблему неравенства // Современная зарубежная психология. 2021. Т. 10. № 1. С. 132–141. https://doi.org/10.17759/jmfp.2021100113Azevedo, F., Jost, J.T., & Rothmund, T. (2017). “Making America great again:” System justification in the U.S. presidential election of 2016. Translational Issues in Psychological Science, 3(3), 231–240. https://doi.org/10.1037/tps0000122Brandt, M.J., & Reyna, C. (2012). Social dominance or system justification? The acceptance of inequality and resistance to social change as unique system-relevant motivations. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2165690Chistopolskaya, K.A., Mitina, O.V., Enikolopov, S.N., Nikolaev, E.L., Semikin, G.I., Ozol, S.N., & Chubina, S.A. (2017). Construction of short Russian versions of death attitude profile-revised and fear of personal death scale. Suicidology, 8(4), 43–55. (In Russ.)Чистопольская К.А., Митина О.В., Ениколопов С.Н., Николаев Е.Л., Семикин Г.И., Озоль С.Н., Чубина С.А. Создание кратких русскоязычных версий опросников «Отношение к смерти» и «Страх личной смерти» // Суицидология. 2017. Т. 8. № 4 (29). C. 43–55.Cichocka, A., & Jost, J.T. (2014). Stripped of illusions? Exploring system justification processes in capitalist and post-Communist societies. International Journal of Psychology, 49(1), 6–29. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijop.12011De Zavala, A.G., Cislak, A., & Wesolowska, E. (2010). Political conservatism, need for cognitive closure, and intergroup hostility. Political Psychology, 31(4), 521–541. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2010.00767.xFederico, C.M., Ergun, D., & Hunt, C. (2014). Opposition to equality and support for tradition as mediators of the relationship between epistemic motivation and system-justifying identifications. Group Processes & Intergroup Relations, 17(4), 524–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/1368430213517273Golec, A. (2002). Need for cognitive closure and political conservatism: Studies on the nature of the relationship. Polish Psychological Bulletin, 33(4), 5–12.Gulevich, O.A., Agadullina, E.R., & Khukhlaev, O.E. (2018). Approval of group hierarchy: Russian version of social dominance orientation scale. Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics, 15(3), 407–426. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2018-3-407-426Гулевич О.А., Агадуллина Е.Р., Хухлаев О.Е. Одобрение групповой иерархии: русскоязычная версия шкалы для измерения ориентации на социальное доминирование // Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2018. Т. 15. № 3. С. 407–426. https://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2018-3-407-426Hennes, E.P., Nam, H.H., Stern, C., & Jost, J.T. (2012). Not all ideologies are created equal: Epistemic, existential, and relational needs predict system-justifying attitudes. Social Cognition, 30(6), 669–688. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2012.30.6.669Ho, A.K., Sidanius, J., Pratto, F., Levin, S., Thomsen, L., Kteily, N., & Sheehy-Skeffington, J. (2012). Social dominance orientation: Revisiting the structure and function of a variable predicting social and political attitudes. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 38(5), 583–606. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167211432765Jost, J.T. (2020). A theory of system justification. Cambridge: Harvard University Press. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674247192Jost, J.T., & Banaji, M.R. (1994). The role of stereotyping in system‐justification and the production of false consciousness. British Journal of Social Psychology, 33(1), 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-8309.1994.tb01008.xJost, J.T., Glaser, J., Kruglanski, A.W., & Sulloway, F.J. (2003). Political conservatism as motivated social cognition. Psychological Bulletin, 129(3), 339–375. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.129.3.339Jost, J.T., Ledgerwood, A., & Hardin, C.D. (2008). Shared reality, system justification, and the relational basis of ideological beliefs. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 2(1), 171–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1751-9004.2007.00056.xJost, J.T., Liviatan, I., van der Toorn, J., Ledgerwood, A., Mandisodza, A., & Nosek, B.A. (2010). System justification: How do we know it's motivated? In D.R. Bobocel, A.C. Kay, M.P. Zanna & J.M. Olson (Eds.), The Psychology of Justice and Legitimacy (pp. 173–203). New York: Psychology Press. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203837658Jost, J.T., Sterling, J., & Stern, C. (2017a). Getting closure on conservatism, or the politics of epistemic and existential motivation. In C.E. Koptez & A. Fishbach (Eds.), The Motivation-Cognition Interface: From the Lab to the Real World: A Festschrift in Honor of Arie W. Kruglanski (pp. 56–87). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315171388-4Jost, J.T., Stern, C., Rule, N.O., & Sterling, J. (2017b). The politics of fear: Is there an ideological asymmetry in existential motivation? Social Cognition, 35(4), 324–353. https://doi.org/10.1521/soco.2017.35.4.324Kay, A.C., Laurin, K., Fitzsimons, G.M., & Landau, M.J. (2014). A functional basis for structure-seeking: Exposure to structure promotes willingness to engage in motivated action. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(2), 486–491. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0034462Kossowska, M., & Van Hiel, A. (2003). The relationship between need for closure and conservative beliefs in Western and Eastern Europe. Political Psychology, 24(3), 501–518. https://doi.org/10.1111/0162-895X.00338Kroh, M. (2007). Measuring left-right political orientation: The choice of response format. Public Opinion Quarterly, 71(2), 204–220. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfm009Ksiazkiewicz, A., Ludeke, S., & Krueger, R. (2016). The role of cognitive style in the link between genes and political ideology. Political Psychology, 37(6), 761–776. https://doi.org/10.1111/pops.12318Morrison, K.R., & Ybarra, O. (2008). The effects of realistic threat and group identification on social dominance orientation. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44(1), 156–163. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2006.12.006Nail, P.R., & McGregor, I. (2009). Conservative shift among liberals and conservatives following 9/11/01. Social Justice Research, 22(2–3), 231–240. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11211-009-0098-zNapier, J.L., & Jost, J.T. (2008). Why are conservatives happier than liberals? Psychological Science, 19(6), 565–572. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.2008.02124.xPratto, F., Sidanius, J., Stallworth, L.M., & Malle, B.F. (1994). Social dominance orientation: A personality variable predicting social and political attitudes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 67(4), 741–763. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.67.4.741Roets, A., & Van Hiel, A. (2011). Item selection and validation of a brief, 15-item version of the Need for Closure Scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 50(1), 90–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2010.09.004Roets, A., Kruglanski, A.W., Kossowska, M., Pierro, A., & Hong, Y.yi. (2015). The motivated gatekeeper of our minds: New directions in need for closure theory and research. In J.M. Olson & M.P. Zanna (Eds.), Advances in Experimental Social Psychology (vol. 52, pp. 221–283). https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.aesp.2015.01.001Schreiber, J.B., Nora, A., Stage, F.K., Barlow, E.A., & King, J. (2006). Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: A review. The Journal of Educational Research, 99(6), 323–338. https://doi.org/10.3200/JOER.99.6.323-338Stern, C., West, T.V., Jost, J.T., & Rule, N.O. (2014). “Ditto heads”: Do conservatives perceive greater consensus within their ranks than liberals? Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 40(9), 1162–1177. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167214537834Tam, K.P., Leung, A.K.Y., & Chiu, C.Y. (2008). On being a mindful authoritarian: Is need for cognition always associated with less punitiveness? Political Psychology, 29(1), 77–91. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2007.00613.xTavits, M., & Letki, N. (2009). When left is right: Party ideology and policy in post-communist Europe. American Political Science Review, 103(4), 555–569. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055409990220Vargas-Salfate, S., Paez, D., Liu, J.H., Pratto, F., & Gil de Zúñiga, H. (2018). A comparison of social dominance theory and system justification: The role of social status in 19 nations. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 44(7), 1060–1076. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218757455Wilkinson, R., & Pickett, K. (2010). The spirit level: Why equality is better for everyone. London: Penguin.Wilson, S.M., & Sibley, C.G. (2013). Social dominance orientation and right-wing authoritarianism: Additive and interactive effects on political conservatism. Political Psychology, 34(2), 277–284. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9221.2012.00929.xWong, P.T.P., Reker, G.T., & Gesser, G. (1994). Death Attitude Profile – Revised: A multidimensional measure of attitudes toward death. In R.A. Neimeyer (Ed.), Death Anxiety Handbook: Research, Instrumentation, and Application (pp. 121–148). New York: Taylor & Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315800813